Man I miss Zappa, always loved the way he showed how ignorant everyone else around him really was, and he didn't even have to open his mouth to do it. What a complete twat Rizzi is here, the guy is really getting worked up, and does nothing but try to belittle Frank and take cheap shots.
I agree. The rating system really worked, didn't it? Kids listen to far more crap now than they ever did. What Frank failed to point out is that making something taboo to kids always always always makes it more attractive & appealing... okay, not JUST to kids. It's the reason our kids die at university campuses every year from alcohol over doses. Making music taboo just makes it more lucrative because it makes it more alluring & everyone makes more money & isn't that really what it's all about?
You know, I sense both points of both sides. On one hand, there needs to be some kind of control, because kids will do some crazy ass shit, even if you monitor everything they consume (which can also be argued, helicoptering may not be the best form of parenting, and no one is advocating that.) If you've ever been in a classroom, you know how difficult children can be to control. They just behave however they want, no matter what good advice is presented to them. But on the other hand, Frank Really drove the point home, Yes artists should be proud of their lyrics, and they have a right to decide what goes on their materials, but if the PMRC want to force them to print endless sheets of ink and paper, and alter the finished product of their material, theirfore altering their livelihood and more importantly altering their property and legacy, then PMRC should absolutely find a way to meet artists in the middle, and PAY for, and ORGANIZE what they are asking for. Not just be outrage and make all these wild claims and demands! That approach honestly sounds like that of a poor approach to parenting a child who has behaved badly. You dont just kick and scream, you offer real solutions. You put the kids in this world, and its your responsibility too! One cannot expect artists to just levy the entire request on a whim of some unwritten moral obligation to fix the lazy parenting which is more than apparent in todays society. The parents have a smidgen of a point "please dont harm children because parenting is hard" But that seems to me as outside of the scope of the financial responsibility of the artist... Frank Zappa is praised and rightly so.
Frank actively spoke out about the policies of both Reagan and Bush administrations and their push towards 'theological fascism'. He was also a supporter of Michael Dukakis in the '88 election. I'd do my homework before you start throwing out partisan politics. I honestly don't think would be a fan of any of the parties at this point.
Karl, if you are going to debate someone you should always aim to win (or "win", as you so delicately put it). Zappa recognised that fact - the stakes (freedom of speech) were too high to simply turn up and go through the motions. Debating idiots isn't a noble past-time - it's essential to put them back in their place. To do this effectively you need to beat them down with your arguement everytime. So yes, you DO need to win. Sorry if that upsets your sensitive disposition but it's still true.
He did not underestimate her, nor did anything she said blow him away. That's so utterly absurd I still think you might be kidding. Especially watching that debate now, not only did he clearly win (also won over the crowd) he was on the right side of history. No credible reasons at the end...? Even assuming that is true, the whole argument was so ridiculous he could have said nothing as a final statement and still won...
That guy was a real douche nozzle. If he was so concerned about what his kids were listening to all he has to do is ask them or monitor their actives. Isn't that the responsibility of the parent?
If by self-indulged you mean with his music, than you would be close to the truth... Frank was in the business to finance his non-lucrative hobby--which was writing structures and compositions for his synclavier machine.
Having just rewatched Zappa's 2nd appearance on Crossfire from the late 80's - in which FZ, refusing to play his opponent's game you could say, gave pretty much one word non-expansive answers (an ironic but sadly ineffective twist on the monologue approach) - I would again have to reiterate my earlier point about aiming to win a debate. My simple point is, if you want to deliver aloof one-word answers, that's cool, but don't expect to win any "converts" to your cause: so why debate at all?
Zappa, according to his own words, had "common sense" on his side. He only spoke when spoken to. And he had truth and posterity on his side. PMRC was a scam and they knew it too
I too am a Zappa fan. But to be a fan of someone's music & even their political stance, should not cause one to be blind to the person's inadequacies or failings. Zappa was not perfect. He was just a man. As I said in my original comment, I don't agree with Candy's position... far from it... & we've seen now that the system is worthless. But as a debater, she won... hands down.
Then you are on the same ground has them. There is good rap and bad rap, like in any genre. You have to stop with your pre conceptions stereotypes, and just be there for your kid and have some awareness.
Parents can't control their children or know their activities 100% of the time. I love rock n roll music and I don't consider the lyrics vulgar. RAP music is downright vulgar. I would raise my kids to not like RAP music and censure what they watch and listen to. After a certain age, you just cannot control and protect them anymore. All you can do as a parent is teach God and God's laws and set a good example. Good parents would know what kind of artists their kids listen to. Don't need labeling.
Dude, you miss my point. Nobody knows Frank as well as I do. I am a real fan. I was just attempting to have a nuanced and intelligent discussion over the possibility that some of this interview did not go as well as it could have. Is that permitted in the world of worshippers like you? Frank would laugh at you, as do I. :)
Well Ricki sure had a lot to say! Zappa's debating style has never been that strong though. He is very adept at monologues and long, expansive answers. Where he has fallen (sometimes) is in replying point-by-point to his opponents. He also tends to get very defensive. Rick wasn't offering anything new so Zappa should have dealt with his every point head-on (including Rick's claim that Zappa was contradicting himself). Failure to do so looks weak. On a good day Zappa would have demolished Rick!
@rolandrog How can you mention teaching "God and God's laws" and then completely contradict that by mentioning that parents should set a good example? You really want to set a good example? Keep "God" as far away from your children as possible. Let them decide for themselves what they believe in without forcing your own beliefs (which you were also forced into) down their throats.
Hmmm, my answers are appearing at the end of this thread. grrr... oh well, i can't answer properly in these tiny character-counting boxes anyhow! Peace:)
Frankly, Karl, I must say that I think Candy did a better job in her debate. He appeared unprepared & her arguments blew him away. I think he underestimated her. I'm not saying she sold me. I don't agree with the system, but for reasons he didn't bring up. He made some good points but seemed lost to bring up credible reasons at the end. I thought Charlie Rose was a dick... very one sided... like he had been fucking Candy in the green room earlier. A host should be more neutral than he was.
